The magazine already gave an explanation for the cover on Tuesday, but as the media has continued to erupt over it, they felt compelled to issue another statement today. And they seem to be more angry about the fact that they were accused of a Photoshop hack job than anything else:

“We’re not denying that it’s cheeky: pushing the boundaries of a ‘normal’ magazine cover. It was our intention to create a cover that looked illustrated, which is why we have been accused of a ‘bad Photoshop’ job. Earlier versions of the illustration of Kate were actually returned to the designer as they looked too real.”

Hear that, guys? They were actually too good at Photoshop and had to reign it in! They also schooled us in what exactly the term ‘Photoshop’ means:

“‘Photoshop’ has become an umbrella term referring to ‘fixing’ photographs – from the acceptable (erasing a temporary pimple) to the dubious; getting rid of bumps, slimming some models and even, horribly, lightening others. ‘Photoshop’ also refers to the software Adobe Photoshop, which can be used not only for ‘correcting’ or improving photographs but also for digital illustration. So yes, this cover was Photoshopped – but it is also so much more than that.”

You learn something new every day. They ended with this, which more or less sums up their view:

We were daring, we were bold, we were innovative, and straying from the norm has confused some and upset others. Feel free to continue this discussion on Twitter using the hashtag #MCKate, and comment on this article.

They didn’t really address the fact that they may have crossed the line because the Duchess does not want to be on magazine covers. That said, the palace hasn’t bothered to issue a statement about the cover, so it’s probably safe to assume that they really don’t care. Therefore, the only remaining issue is whether or not it was actually bad Photoshopping, and that happenseveryday. It’s time to put this to rest.